User talk:Sangdeboeuf/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Sangdeboeuf (talk | contribs) Archiving of talk page |
m K6ka moved page User talk:Coconutporkpie/Archive 1 to User talk:Sangdeboeuf/Archive 1: Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Coconutporkpie" to "Sangdeboeuf" |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 02:08, 11 October 2016
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Sangdeboeuf. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Welcome!
|
Among Other Things
Thanks for the improvements you've been making to articles, and also, out of curiosity, does your username refer to a porkpie hat made of a coconut, or a meatpie made with coconut?--Mr Fink (talk) 03:11, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Invitation
You've been invited to be part of WikiProject Cosmology | |
Hello. Your contributions to Wikipedia have been analyzed and it seems that this new Wikiproject would be interesting to you. I hope you can contribute to it by expanding the main page and later start editing the articles in its scope. Make sure to check out the Talk page for more information! Cheers |
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar | |
For a lot of small, but constructive, contributions in your first few months here. Keep it up! AstroCog (talk) 02:33, 11 January 2015 (UTC) |
Aligning tables
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
How can I edit the following table to align it with the right side of the page? Coconutporkpie (talk) 17:08, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
- Add style="float:right" to the first line, see b:Editing Wikitext/Tables. JohnCD (talk) 18:02, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Placement of text/image
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
What is the best way to edit the following layout so that the table and accompanying text always appear beneath the map image? —Coconutporkpie (talk) 03:01, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
- Place {{clear left}} below the image. Datbubblegumdoetalkcontribs 03:15, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Making sidebar visible in mobile view
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
How can I make Template:Corporal punishment visible in mobile view (example page: corporal punishment in the home), as is Template:Martin Luther King, Jr. sidebar on the page Martin Luther King, Jr. Day? I checked WP:SIDEBAR for guidance, but didn't find the answer there. —Coconutporkpie (talk) 23:28, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
- Sidebars generally are deliberately not displayed in mobile view; the Martin Luther King Jr. one, which is not based on the {{sidebar}} template, is an exception. I would advise against following that example unless there's a good reason to deviate from the norm. Huon (talk) 00:29, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Test
§§ Aligning tables and Previous section
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar | |
Lots of useful contributions, from a Coconut, to another Coconut, you have my applause. Regards, CoconutPaste (talk) 16:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC) |
Proposed deletion of Playfulness
The article Playfulness has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Wikipedia is not a dictionary
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Animalparty! (talk) 19:48, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Charity watchdog for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charity watchdog is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charity watchdog until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 14:47, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Following rules
Coconutporkpie, I do not mean to butt heads with you or offend you, and would rather work with you than against you. I certainly prefer to discuss when necessary than to edit war. But I do feel that you often interpret Wikipedia's rules too strictly. That's why I replied the way I did to you in this section at Talk:Child abuse, in this discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film, and, most recently, in this section on my talk page where Checkingfax weighed in. Rules should be followed, but not so rigidly; this is why people point to WP:Ignore all rules or WP:Common sense, or even the "The advice in this guideline is not limited to the examples provided and should not be applied rigidly." part of the WP:Words to watch guideline. I know that you and SMcCandlish disagreed at Talk:Child abuse, but he can explain better than I can what I mean about not being too strict when it comes to following the rules. So, hopefully, he weighs in here and offers some advice. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:31, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
School corporal punishment
Hello, I was just wondering why you thought there were no schools in the sense that we understand them in the Middle Ages. At least in the UK there were grammar schools in that era -- and even before (my own school was founded in the 8th century). I believe the use of CP in schools descends directly from that culture. So I am not persuaded that it was right to remove the birching drawing. -- Alarics (talk) 08:44, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
- Image has been restored as of 25 November. —Coconutporkpie (talk) 00:46, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Help w/image template
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Following one of the examples at Template:Multiple image, I've tried to make a layout (below) using three images from Commons, but the images don't show up on the page. What am I missing? —Coconutporkpie (talk) 07:37, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
- You missed the part of the instructions that said "filename only, i.e. without "File:" or "Image:" prefix". JohnCD (talk) 08:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Inappropriate attempts alter the talk page at Ajax (play)
Please leave the talk page alone. The record of your pattern of recent poor behaviour there belongs where it is. • DP • {huh?} 22:26, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- I think you may be overreacting here. Would you care to define "poor behavior" and provide examples of specific edits? —Coconutporkpie (talk) Coconutporkpie (talk) 23:05, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
I would define poor behaviour as the latest in a tediously long line of inappropriate behaviours that the edit page details. • DP • {huh?} 01:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
September 2016
Your recent editing history at Talk:Ajax (play) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Softlavender (talk) 23:49, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- It takes two to edit-war. I'm referring to this edit here, plus this edit and this edit. I would call that a perfect example of how not to follow the three-revert rule. —Coconutporkpie (talk) 01:35, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- It takes one to ignore several editors' requests that you stop. • DP • {huh?} 01:42, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 00:44, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Note
If archiving or moving of discussions has been objected to, please do not repeat the action unless there is consensus to do so. --NeilN talk to me 00:51, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- The AN3 complaint is now closed with a warning that you may be blocked if you archive again at Talk:Ajax (play) without getting prior consensus. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 22:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
"User:Coconutporkpie . . . appears to believe that it is fine to move material to talk archives against the wishes of of the other participants"
– While I find such efforts at mind-reading to be impressive in terms of their audacity, it might be simpler to ask me what I believe. —Coconutporkpie (talk) 22:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)- You have removed threads from Talk:Ajax (play) nine times since August 30. In most cases, someone else then reverted your change. A fact that suggests your removals did not have consensus. It also indicates a pattern of edit warring, which is a basis for admins to take action. EdJohnston (talk) 22:39, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- And which of those things proves "belief" exactly? —Coconutporkpie (talk) 22:50, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- There's no reason for me to comment further here. EdJohnston (talk) 23:04, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- Is that a way of saying that you cannot answer the question, or that you find the question to be inappropriate? —Coconutporkpie (talk) 23:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- WP:EW is a policy, and it takes precedence over the guidelines you cite in edit summaries as reasons for archiving, such as WP:TALKO. If you believe that User:NeilN and I warned you inappropriately you can appeal at ANI. EdJohnston (talk) 01:05, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- That doesn't answer my question. —Coconutporkpie (talk) 02:25, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- WP:EW is a policy, and it takes precedence over the guidelines you cite in edit summaries as reasons for archiving, such as WP:TALKO. If you believe that User:NeilN and I warned you inappropriately you can appeal at ANI. EdJohnston (talk) 01:05, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Is that a way of saying that you cannot answer the question, or that you find the question to be inappropriate? —Coconutporkpie (talk) 23:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- There's no reason for me to comment further here. EdJohnston (talk) 23:04, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- And which of those things proves "belief" exactly? —Coconutporkpie (talk) 22:50, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
- You have removed threads from Talk:Ajax (play) nine times since August 30. In most cases, someone else then reverted your change. A fact that suggests your removals did not have consensus. It also indicates a pattern of edit warring, which is a basis for admins to take action. EdJohnston (talk) 22:39, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Sangdeboeuf. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |